Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Monitors and Displays › Are you on a 16:10 or 16:9 monitor?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Are you on a 16:10 or 16:9 monitor? - Page 21  

Poll Results: Which aspect ratio is your monitor?

 
  • 49% (200)
    16:10
  • 50% (208)
    16:9
408 Total Votes  
post #201 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by De-Zant View Post
That 16:9 quote means nothing. Highest consumer grade 16:10 is 2560x1600, highest cons grade 16:9 2560x1440.
Here we go again.

"DisplaySearch, the worldwide leader in display market research and consulting, emphasizes the need for action in its recently released topical report, 16:9 Notebook PC and LCD Monitor Analysis." cant be trusted, listen to de-Zant.
http://www.displaysearch.com/cps/rde...8_16by9_PR.asp

Seriously. You make a fool out of yourself claiming that you are more reliable than Displaysearch.

Thats what I say. 16:10 users dont have sources for their claims. They simply cant handle the truth.
Edited by Hydros - 10/19/11 at 3:07pm
post #202 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrews2547 View Post
Just because something is more popular doesn't make it better.
You don't think that maybe, maybe, there is a reason why it's so popular? Maybe because it is better? Nahh, it can't be...
The i5 2500k is probably the most popular CPU for a build. Does that mean it's a bad processor? No, it's more popular because it's a good CPU. Same with the Asus P8P67, everyone uses it and it's popular because it's a good motherboard.

Statistics don't lie--16:9 is the popular and dominant resolution, primarily due to the 1080p "full HD" video standard.

Anyhow...16:10 is such an odd aspect ratio...I'm quite surprised there are so many people using it.
post #203 of 285
I clearly remember 680x420 being a high resolution monitor. Over the years, I worked up to the astonishingly beautiful 1024x768. Then 1600x1200 on a $1,200 21" Sony CRT. Now I am using a $350 Viewsonic LED-LCD 1080P and it is perfect for my uses. Color reproduction was a touch better on the CRT, but the larger screen, higher res., and room on my desk more than makes up for that.....
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Gulftown 970  Asus Sabertooth X58 PNY GeForce GTX580 Mushkin Redline 999000 12GB 3x4 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
2xWD Black Caviar 750GB Asus Blue Ray DVDRW x 2 Noctua NH-U12P SE2R Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Viewsonic 27" LCD  Filco Ninja Mech. MX browns Corsair Gold AX850 Corsair Obsidian 650D 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logictech Trackman Max Payne Creative Fatal1ty Xfi  
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Gulftown 970  Asus Sabertooth X58 PNY GeForce GTX580 Mushkin Redline 999000 12GB 3x4 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
2xWD Black Caviar 750GB Asus Blue Ray DVDRW x 2 Noctua NH-U12P SE2R Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Viewsonic 27" LCD  Filco Ninja Mech. MX browns Corsair Gold AX850 Corsair Obsidian 650D 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logictech Trackman Max Payne Creative Fatal1ty Xfi  
  hide details  
post #204 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hydros View Post
Here we go again.

"DisplaySearch, the worldwide leader in display market research and consulting, emphasizes the need for action in its recently released topical report, 16:9 Notebook PC and LCD Monitor Analysis." cant be trusted, listen to de-Zant.
http://www.displaysearch.com/cps/rde...8_16by9_PR.asp

Seriously. You make a fool out of yourself claiming that you are more reliable than Displaysearch.

Thats what I say. 16:10 dont have sources for their claims. They simply cant handle the truth.
I never said 16:9 wasn't getting more and more and more and more common. You are arguing against a point I didn't make.

My point has always been that all aspect ratios are still supported just as fine as 16:9 with a few exceptions (a handful of games, where you could just letterbox)

I'm not more trustable than the editor on displaysearch who wrote that article, or added that little comment about 16:9 having higher res, because I don't have enough of a reputation, but It does not mean I am not more correct than him though.

Please list the highest 16:10 and 16:9 resolutions in the consumer grade market. Want to prove your point? List those two! BE DONE WITH IT. And, consumer grade. That means mass produced, widely available, and only a few thousand dollars tops.

I know the "higher end" projectors and panels are 16:9 or wider, but those do not meet the consumer grade specification


Besides, I feel as if his choice of words referred to lower resolutions, not the absolute max resolutions. For example 1680x1050 vs 1920x1080, which was the common transition among bigger laptops. And desktops. But the comment does not apply to highest consumer end.
Toki
(10 items)
 
  
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
[i7 860] [XFX 5870] [4x2gb] [WD 500gb] 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
[W7] [HP LP3065 - CrossOver 27Q LED-P - Acer x243w] Ducky DK1087-CELLB Tenkeyless, MX Blue - Steels... [LC power 750W] 
Audio
[ATH-A700] + [Asus Xonar DG] 
  hide details  
Toki
(10 items)
 
  
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
[i7 860] [XFX 5870] [4x2gb] [WD 500gb] 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
[W7] [HP LP3065 - CrossOver 27Q LED-P - Acer x243w] Ducky DK1087-CELLB Tenkeyless, MX Blue - Steels... [LC power 750W] 
Audio
[ATH-A700] + [Asus Xonar DG] 
  hide details  
post #205 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwiasian View Post
You don't think that maybe, maybe, there is a reason why it's so popular? Maybe because it is better? Nahh, it can't be...
The i5 2500k is probably the most popular CPU for a build. Does that mean it's a bad processor? No, it's more popular because it's a good CPU. Same with the Asus P8P67, everyone uses it and it's popular because it's a good motherboard
I said "just because it is more popular doesn't make it better" not "just because its popular it is going to be worse"
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Ryzen R5 1600 Asus PRIME B350 PLUS  AMD Radeon HD7950 16GB Corsair Vengence (2x8GB) 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOS
1TB WD Blue 500GB WD Blue 120GB Hitachi Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
LG 32LD450 Dell Ducky DK9008 OCN Edition Corsair TX650v2 
Case
Fractal Design Core 3000 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Ryzen R5 1600 Asus PRIME B350 PLUS  AMD Radeon HD7950 16GB Corsair Vengence (2x8GB) 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOS
1TB WD Blue 500GB WD Blue 120GB Hitachi Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
LG 32LD450 Dell Ducky DK9008 OCN Edition Corsair TX650v2 
Case
Fractal Design Core 3000 
  hide details  
post #206 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hydros View Post
Here we go again.

"DisplaySearch, the worldwide leader in display market research and consulting, emphasizes the need for action in its recently released topical report, 16:9 Notebook PC and LCD Monitor Analysis." cant be trusted, listen to de-Zant.
http://www.displaysearch.com/cps/rde...8_16by9_PR.asp

Seriously. You make a fool out of yourself claiming that you are more reliable than Displaysearch.

Thats what I say. 16:10 users dont have sources for their claims. They simply cant handle the truth.
What's funny is how you find that one sentence in the entire article to contain the most substance in the entire article. They're saying that "16:9 products provide higher resolution and wider aspect ratio" but nowhere else in the article explains their statement. Yet you still stand by that one sentence and tell us that it's a valid statement yet there's no validity behind it. Same goes for that market share website, it's complete crap as 30-something percent is under "other resolution." Yet you still stand by it.

The reason why I don't need sources is down to BASIC MATH, something you can't grasp. I don't need a source to tell me that 2560x1600 is a bigger resolution than 2560x1440, therefore making 16:10 bigger than 16:9. Then it goes back to when I explained aspect ratios in my last post and you said that I didn't understand it right (which is wrong), yet you couldn't explain it any better, therefore what do you know?
Time Sink
(21 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 2500k ASUS Sabertooth Z77 EVGA GTX 670 FTW G.Skill Ripjaws 8GB (2x4GB) DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Samsung F3 1TB Crucial C300 128GB Corsair Force GT 60GB Noctua NH-U12P 
OSOSMonitorMonitor
Windows 8.1 Professional x64 Apple OS X Mavericks HP ZR24w LG IPS226V 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Razer BlackWidow Seasonic X750 Lian-Li PC-A05B Logitech M500 
Mouse PadAudioAudioAudio
Mionix Propus 380 Zero USB DAC (2009 Version) Emotiva Pro airmotiv 4 Beyerdynamic DT990 600ohm 
Audio
Shure SRH-840 
  hide details  
Time Sink
(21 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 2500k ASUS Sabertooth Z77 EVGA GTX 670 FTW G.Skill Ripjaws 8GB (2x4GB) DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Samsung F3 1TB Crucial C300 128GB Corsair Force GT 60GB Noctua NH-U12P 
OSOSMonitorMonitor
Windows 8.1 Professional x64 Apple OS X Mavericks HP ZR24w LG IPS226V 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Razer BlackWidow Seasonic X750 Lian-Li PC-A05B Logitech M500 
Mouse PadAudioAudioAudio
Mionix Propus 380 Zero USB DAC (2009 Version) Emotiva Pro airmotiv 4 Beyerdynamic DT990 600ohm 
Audio
Shure SRH-840 
  hide details  
post #207 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by De-Zant View Post
I'm not more trustable than the editor on displaysearch who wrote that article, or added that little comment about 16:9 having higher res, because I don't have enough of a reputation, but It does not mean I am not more correct than him though.
Seriously man. This is totally ridicolous and you make a fool out of your self claiming that you are as reliable as Displaysearch.

But you just showed that you are a very good example of what I just said.

16:10 users dont have any sources for their claims what so ever.
post #208 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by ImmortalKenny View Post
The reason why I don't need sources is down to BASIC MATH, something you can't grasp. I don't need a source to tell me that 2560x1600 is a bigger resolution than 2560x1440, therefore making 16:10 bigger than 16:9. Then it goes back to when I explained aspect ratios in my last post and you said that I didn't understand it right (which is wrong), yet you couldn't explain it any better, therefore what do you know?
At least I'm not the only one in this thread with common sense
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Ryzen R5 1600 Asus PRIME B350 PLUS  AMD Radeon HD7950 16GB Corsair Vengence (2x8GB) 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOS
1TB WD Blue 500GB WD Blue 120GB Hitachi Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
LG 32LD450 Dell Ducky DK9008 OCN Edition Corsair TX650v2 
Case
Fractal Design Core 3000 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Ryzen R5 1600 Asus PRIME B350 PLUS  AMD Radeon HD7950 16GB Corsair Vengence (2x8GB) 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOS
1TB WD Blue 500GB WD Blue 120GB Hitachi Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
LG 32LD450 Dell Ducky DK9008 OCN Edition Corsair TX650v2 
Case
Fractal Design Core 3000 
  hide details  
post #209 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hydros View Post
Seriously man. This is totally ridicolous and you make a fool out of your self claiming that you are as reliable as Displaysearch.

But you just showed that you are a very good example of what I just said.

16:10 users dont have any sources for their claims what so ever.
I'll give you a source, just wait a minute.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Ryzen R5 1600 Asus PRIME B350 PLUS  AMD Radeon HD7950 16GB Corsair Vengence (2x8GB) 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOS
1TB WD Blue 500GB WD Blue 120GB Hitachi Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
LG 32LD450 Dell Ducky DK9008 OCN Edition Corsair TX650v2 
Case
Fractal Design Core 3000 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Ryzen R5 1600 Asus PRIME B350 PLUS  AMD Radeon HD7950 16GB Corsair Vengence (2x8GB) 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOS
1TB WD Blue 500GB WD Blue 120GB Hitachi Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
LG 32LD450 Dell Ducky DK9008 OCN Edition Corsair TX650v2 
Case
Fractal Design Core 3000 
  hide details  
post #210 of 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hydros View Post
Here we go again.

"DisplaySearch, the worldwide leader in display market research and consulting, emphasizes the need for action in its recently released topical report, 16:9 Notebook PC and LCD Monitor Analysis." cant be trusted, listen to de-Zant.
http://www.displaysearch.com/cps/rde...8_16by9_PR.asp

Seriously. You make a fool out of yourself claiming that you are more reliable than Displaysearch.

Thats what I say. 16:10 users dont have sources for their claims. They simply cant handle the truth.
Dude, it's personal preference. There is not a "better resolution".

What's next? Are you going to convince people that blue is better than red?

You have issues...
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 950 3.2 GHz at 1.0V Asus Rampage III Formula Asus HD6870 6GB Mushkin Redline 1600MHz 6-8-6-24 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 250 GB SSD,2X 1TB F3, 250GB WD Blue, 1T... Asus BD Megahalems black chrome edition Windows 7 Professional 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
2x Asus 24" Mac keyboard Enermax ERV950EWT Silverstone FT02 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech MX518 Steelseries I-2 Onkyo 1000W 7.1 surround through HDMI 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 950 3.2 GHz at 1.0V Asus Rampage III Formula Asus HD6870 6GB Mushkin Redline 1600MHz 6-8-6-24 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 250 GB SSD,2X 1TB F3, 250GB WD Blue, 1T... Asus BD Megahalems black chrome edition Windows 7 Professional 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
2x Asus 24" Mac keyboard Enermax ERV950EWT Silverstone FT02 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech MX518 Steelseries I-2 Onkyo 1000W 7.1 surround through HDMI 
  hide details  
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Monitors and Displays
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Monitors and Displays › Are you on a 16:10 or 16:9 monitor?